Americans rely on banks to serve them without regard to their political affiliation, religious beliefs, and other personal characteristics. Yet, recent years have brought doubts about whether banks are living up to this expectation. A growing number of Americans say they are victims of “debanking” – the practice of major banks closing or refusing to open accounts for individuals or organizations on the basis of their political, religious, or social views.

President Donald Trump threw a spotlight on concerns about debanking mere days after taking office in an address to the World Economic Forum.

“I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank, and that included a place called Bank of America,” Trump said.

Debanking is a problem for Americans both individually and in groups. In one instance, Chase closed the account of a religious nonprofit organization without warning. When asked to reconsider, they demanded to see the group’s confidential donor list and a list of candidates they supported in upcoming elections.

An organization’s political leanings should have no bearing on their ability to open a bank account. The demand for access to a nonprofit’s donor list is also highly inappropriate. Even if the bank itself did not misuse the information, even a single rogue employee with access to the list could do irreversible damage to donor privacy and public trust.

Bank of America and Chase, both of whom were called out by Trump in his remarks, deny that they discriminate against customers on the basis of politics. Following Trump’s comments, however, the Senate Banking Committee held a hearing to investigate the practice. Despite an increasingly polarized political climate, concerns about debanking proved to be bipartisan.

“It doesn’t matter who you voted for, what you believe in, or the origin of your last name, people shouldn’t be arbitrarily denied access to their banks, locked out of their accounts or stripped of their banking privileges,” said Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) at the February 5 hearing.

This is one issue all Americans can agree on. For free speech to flourish, people must be able to criticize powerful institutions like the government, or the banks themselves, without being targeted for retaliation. Debanking is one way powerful interests can attempt to silence and choke off support for those who challenge them. That’s something debanking shares in common with other leading threats to free speech today, such as pressuring social media companies to censor so-called “misinformation” or attacking the privacy of donors to nonprofits and advocacy groups.

Politics has seeped into more and more parts of our lives over time, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Banking, free speech, and financial privacy would be good places to start.